MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1714973413 · doi:10.3138/cbmh.20.2.265

Malignant Histories: Psychosomatic Medicine and the Female Cancer Patient in the Postwar Era

2003· article· en· W1714973413 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Patricia Jasen

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Health History · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMedical History and Research
Canadian institutionsLakehead University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPersonalityOrthodoxyHuman sexualityPsychoanalytic theoryPsychosomatic medicinePsychoanalysisFemininityAlternative medicineCriticismOpenness to experienceCancerMedicinePsychologyGender studiesPsychiatryPsychotherapistSociologyPolitical scienceSocial psychologyHistoryLawInternal medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cancer had often been linked with unhappy emotions in the past, but this association entered a new phase in the middle of the 20th century as a result of research in the field of psychosomatic medicine conducted in the United States during the 1950s. There researchers focused particularly upon cancer in women, and were strongly influenced by the prevailing psychoanalytic orthodoxy surrounding the nature of femininity and normal female sexuality. The results of these studies, which appeared in the Journal Psychosomatic Medicine, confirmed the personality-cancer link out but were rife with erroneous assumptions and faulty methodologies. They were widely publicized, nonetheless, and were instrumental in promoting the association between repression and cancer, especially in women. Despite criticism, their influence was manifest in psycho-oncological research in many countries during the decades which followed and popular notions of the "cancer personality."

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.992
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.089
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.200 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Health HistorySame topicMedical History and ResearchFrench-language works237,207